If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Re: Espn Power rankings Pacers #8

The argument is not which one is better. It is who is a better fit. Personally, I believe that DC is a better player than DJ. But DJ could be a better fit for our team. That would improve us as fit > talent.

Re: Espn Power rankings Pacers #8

Well, the last season and the playoffs said so. We will see if anything is going to change this season.

And we waxed OKC and LAL the exact same way. Does it say anything?

We didn't beat OKC and LAL on back to backs in a weekend. The Knicks beat us two consecutive days by a combined total of 29 points. One loss can be a fluke, but there's something alarming when it happens back to back days to the same team.

All I'm saying is that I think that too many people on this forum and around the NBA in general have written the Knicks off. Do I think we could beat them in the playoffs? Absolutely. But would I be the least bit surprised if they beat us.

Also, the Knicks would have likely steamrolled the Magic just like we did. And we won one more game against the Heat than them, but they had to contend with Bosh for the entire series.

Re: Espn Power rankings Pacers #8

The argument is not which one is better. It is who is a better fit. Personally, I believe that DC is a better player than DJ. But DJ could be a better fit for our team. That would improve us as fit > talent.

That may be true. But I'm just explaining why a national writer like Stein isn't overly impressed with our personnel moves.

Re: Espn Power rankings Pacers #8

We didn't beat OKC and LAL on back to backs in a weekend. The Knicks beat us two consecutive days by a combined total of 29 points. One loss can be a fluke, but there's something alarming when it happens back to back days to the same team.

All I'm saying is that I think that too many people on this forum and around the NBA in general have written the Knicks off. Do I think we could beat them in the playoffs? Absolutely. But would I be the least bit surprised if they beat us.

Also, the Knicks would have likely steamrolled the Magic just like we did. And we won one more game against the Heat than them, but they had to contend with Bosh for the entire series.

The Knicks have a ton of pure talent. No one is debating that. If the games were played on paper, they would easily be better than the Pacers. The problem is, their talent doesn't mesh very well. It's a poorly put together roster. While they have the ability to click on any given night (or two, since you seem to be putting an alarming amount of stock in a random back-to-back), I don't think they can sustain that throughout an entire season or throughout a playoff series against a team that is relatively close in talent but more cohesively put together.

Re: Espn Power rankings Pacers #8

The Knicks beat us two consecutive days by a combined total of 29 points. One loss can be a fluke, but there's something alarming when it happens back to back days to the same team.

Fresh off a coaching change, no fanbase should understand how that can re-energize a team better than us.

"Nobody wants to play against Tyler Hansbrough NO BODY!" ~ Frank Vogel

"And David put his hand in the bag and took out a stone and slung it. And it struck the Philistine on the head and he fell to the ground. Amen. "
Want your own "Just Say No to Kamen" from @mkroeger pic? http://twitpic.com/a3hmca

All I'm saying is that I think that too many people on this forum and around the NBA in general have written the Knicks off. Do I think we could beat them in the playoffs? Absolutely. But would I be the least bit surprised if they beat us.

There are several people who have written the Knicks off but there's a good reason for this. Their flaws are quite obvious.

Personally, I'm not going to write them off just yet for the simple reason that this is the first full season under Woodson. I'll have to wait and see how they perform before I judge them.

Also, the Knicks would have likely steamrolled the Magic just like we did. And we won one more game against the Heat than them, but they had to contend with Bosh for the entire series.

Yeah, they would probably beat the Magic.

About the Heat series though. It's not a matter of 4 - 1 vs 4 - 2. It's the matter that both teams lost the series. The Heat never beat the Pacers by 33 points. I repeat, 33 points. Also, the Knicks were never ahead in the series. We were ahead 2 - 1 at one point. Their only win came after they were already down 3 - 0.

I can see why some people have not written the Knicks off. I can see why they still consider them formidable opponents. And I do as well. But the idea of them being better than us just because they have sexier names is preposterous.

Re: Espn Power rankings Pacers #8

Collison and Augistin essentially cancel each other out. If Augistin is better than Collison, it isn't by much. Augistin was able to do a lot more last year because he was on such a bad team. Collison had to share with George Hill.

Our net gain was essentially Gerald Green, Ian Mahinmi, a rookie, and some scrubs for training camp. That's not enough to make a national writer like Stein bat an eye. It's pretty weak compared to what most teams in the East did this offseason.

This wasn't the offseason moves power rankings though... I believe they did those a month or two ago...

This is the actual power rankings... And I don't see how a team that finished 5th in the league and lost in 6 to the eventual champs in the 2nd round and then added talent to the bench plus should grow some talent in 3 of the 5 starters doesn't put us a notch or two higher than we are here...

I can see how everyone not named Philly or Clippers are ahead of us though...

The Clippers are way overrated... All offense no D...

And I'm not sold on Bynum being a savior in Philly... As others have pointed out he has some major maturity issues to overcome and is very injury prone... I don't see him leading them past a playoff birth this year... They scream first round out to me...

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to J7F For This Useful Post:

Re: Espn Power rankings Pacers #8

A few thoughts:

You cannot overlook Bynum's history of immaturity when talking about the Sixers. For years he was kept in check in LA by Phil, Kobe, Gasol, Fisher, etc. We saw how he reacted to a new, younger coach last season and I wasn't impressed. In addition to very real concerns over his injury history, I think there are huge question marks surrounding his ability to be a franchise player - especially in a tough media market. Consider me unimpressed by Philly.

As far as the Clippers, unless Vinny Del Negro was replaced, I don't see them doing much. They're almost like a mid-2000s Phoenix Suns redux. Sexy pick, I'll be watching them on league pass, but I don't think they're one of the 10 best teams in the league.

Boston has come in with the age questions each of the last 3 years. At some point they are going to break down, but until I actually see it happen, I have no problems with them where they are on this list.

If Minnesota's roster played for the New York Knicks or Brooklyn Nets, I seriously feel like they would crack the top 10 in a lot of these rankings. Rubio coming back (assuming he's fully recovered from his knee injury) is going to be huge - they were on track for a playoff spot before he got hurt last year. Wouldn't surprise me to see them challenging the Utah/Dallas/Memphis slots in the West.

I have no idea what Portland will do this year, but Lillard will be a treat to watch. Wouldn't be surprised at all to see them in the playoffs.

The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Eddie Gill For This Useful Post:

Re: Espn Power rankings Pacers #8

I also understand how San An and Boston are put above us with the way their veterans pushed them to another level later last season... But those aging teams have Indiana and Denver respectively waiting to overthrow them...

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to ECKrueger For This Useful Post:

Re: Espn Power rankings Pacers #8

The problem with these rankings is they really are mostly just looking at the stat sheets, and not taking into consideration all of the intangibles. Sexy names are nice, but as the Knicks have proven you need more than sexy names, and a sexy name doesn't always mean that player is more talented either. I think this is missed most of all with Bynum. Not only does he have maturity and injury issues, but as far as I can remember outside of maybe his first season or two he hasn't spent a season as the best post player on his team. At best he was the third best player on the Lakers any given season, put him in a situation where he is the focal point and given his maturity issues I see him as being put in a position where he is just as likely to be an epic failure as he is to be their savior.

I'll give him the benefit of the doubt on the Clippers, but not on the 76ers. Not when they had to give up Iggy.

Re: Espn Power rankings Pacers #8

Honestly I would probably take the clippers (Blake Paul, and company) over our roster. They have a ton of talent...

Yeah, they had a lot of similar talent last year as well and I think our squad was better last year. The Clippers will be good, but it's too early to tell if that roster will live up to it's potential. They have Crawford who didn't fair too well in Portland last year. We all know Lamar Odom was just terrible last year. Matt Barnes has never been anything special imo. Grant Hill will be good for them. They basically added a bunch of small forwards and guards who can play small forward.

As for the Sixers, they should not be ahead of us by any means. They added Bynum and that's about it. They are relying on Turner to make a big improvement and I don't think it'll happen.

Also, I have a lot of doubts about the Nets. They added some decent pieces on paper I guess, but the biggest name was Joe Johnson and I don't think he automatically makes them a contender by any means. Imo the Nets will be anywhere from an 8th seed at worst, 5th seed at their complete best.

Re: Espn Power rankings Pacers #8

i think the #8 ranking is at least arguably fair. I think were better than the Clippers and the 76ers, but I can see how most others would disagree. The Clippers are obviously loaded with talent, and should be better this year with Crawford, a full season of Billups and Grant Hill addressing the weaknesses in their roster from last year.

And people forget that the 76ers had arguably at least as good a postseason as the Pacers did. They pretty handedly beat the 1 seed without Derrick Rose (we did the same against a worse Magic team without Dwight) and took the Celtics to 7, who came within a good 4th quarter of beating the Heat. And regardless of how much theyll miss Iggy, their improvements from last year are more apparent than ours (Nick Young, Dorrell Wright and the clear cut 2nd best center in the league) and their room for internal improvement is at least as great as ours (Evan Turner and Jrue Holiday mainly).

If we were objectively trying to look at the situation from the outside, I think opinions here would change. If the 76ers signed Mahimni, Green and DJ in teh offseason (and drafted Miles Plumlee), and we traded say Danny for Andrew Bynum, I guarantee you most people here would be laughing at the 76ers offseason acquisitions, probably saying they didnt get any better at all, while we were poised to win the East.

Re: Espn Power rankings Pacers #8

i think the #8 ranking is at least arguably fair. I think were better than the Clippers and the 76ers, but I can see how most others would disagree. The Clippers are obviously loaded with talent, and should be better this year with Crawford, a full season of Billups and Grant Hill addressing the weaknesses in their roster from last year.

And people forget that the 76ers had arguably at least as good a postseason as the Pacers did. They pretty handedly beat the 1 seed without Derrick Rose (we did the same against a worse Magic team without Dwight) and took the Celtics to 7, who came within a good 4th quarter of beating the Heat. And regardless of how much theyll miss Iggy, their improvements from last year are more apparent than ours (Nick Young, Dorrell Wright and the clear cut 2nd best center in the league) and their room for internal improvement is at least as great as ours (Evan Turner and Jrue Holiday mainly).

If we were objectively trying to look at the situation from the outside, I think opinions here would change. If the 76ers signed Mahimni, Green and DJ in teh offseason (and drafted Miles Plumlee), and we traded say Danny for Andrew Bynum, I guarantee you most people here would be laughing at the 76ers offseason acquisitions, probably saying they didnt get any better at all, while we were poised to win the East.

You can't rate a team that is entirely dependent on growth to be good, higher than a team that has already proved to be good and only need growth to improve. The 76ers lost 3 starters, and added Bynum. A guy that has shown great immaturity in the past.

The Pacers were better last year, and now get to grow. The 76ers lost the heart and soul of their team and added pieces that might work well together. Thats a big MIGHT